Modeling kinetics-transport interactions during biomass torrefaction: The effects of temperature, particle size, and moisture content

Abstract

ABSTRACT:A comprehensive one-dimensional model accounting for the effects of heat and mass transfer, chemical kinetics, and drying was developed to describe the torrefaction of a single woody biomass particle. The thermochemical sub-models depend only on previously determined or measured characteristics, avoiding the use of fitting or tuning parameters and enabling a rigorous energy balance of the process. Moreover, a high temperature drying sub-model is introduced which overcomes the difficulties associated with existing approaches to give physically consistent results, smooth implementation, and numerical stability. The particle model was validated against experimental data from the literature for intraparticle temperature profiles, particle mass and energy yields over a range of particle sizes and reaction temperatures. The modeling results describe well the three distinct stages observed during the torrefaction of large particles including the heatup, drying, heat release due to exothermic reactions resulting in thermal overshoot, followed by thermal equilibrium where conversion is governed by mass loss kinetics. The nonlinear effects of particle size, temperature, moisture content, and residence time on the mass and energy yields are quantified and explained. Larger particles exhibit a significant internal temperature gradient and strong temperature overshoot especially at the centerline. The magnitude of the overshoot is a function of the conductivity, particle size, and average heat release rate. Because of the rise in the reaction rate, higher temperatures increase the sensitivity of the process to particle size. Due to the dependence of drying rate on heat transfer limitations, the sensitivity of torrefaction to initial moisture content increases strongly with particle size. Highlights: 1D coupled model describes the dynamics of drying and torrefaction of a single particle  Model predicts particle temperature overshoot, elemental, and energy balance  Validated against single particle experimental results from literature  Larger particles convert more non-uniformly with higher thermal overshoot.  Higher temperatures and increased moisture content exacerbate particle size effects

Application of a detailed biomass pyrolysis kinetic scheme to hardwood and softwood torrefaction

“…A higher parameter is required to model the lab-reactor experiments due to the higher extent of secondary charring. Moreover, even though slow heating rates have been employed in the lab-scale experiments, intra-particle gradients can be present due to the endothermic drying, heat transfer limitations during the heat-up phase and exothermic reactions afterwards [34]. The ''x" parameter may to some extent include these phenomena.…”

Biomass gasification under high solar heat flux: Advanced modelling

“…Some of the produced steam travels to colder area where it could condense. It was thought that thermal models and Arrhenius type models would be too simplistic to accurately describe these phenomena [44][45][46][47][48]. Drying was therefore modelled using liquid-vapour equilibrium featuring liquid, bound water and steam transport.…”

Steam‐air blown bubbling fluidized bed biomass gasification (BFBBG): Multi‐scale models and experimental validation

“…As identified in the time‐scale analysis, the dominant heat transfer resistance for millimeter‐scale particles is external. For actively pyrolyzing particles, mass transfer occurs rapidly outward and is driven by the increased internal gas pressure from freshly formed volatile products . As a result, intraparticle reactions are neglected and the particles can be assumed to be internally uniform—heating up according to the following time varying temperature profile, where T r is the reactor temperature in K, T bio,0 is the initial temperature of the biomass entering the reactor, and characteristic time‐scale for heat transfer t ext,HX is identical to that shown in Table .…”

“…The cold gas efficiency based on the higher heating value (HHV) of all gas phase components divided by the heating value of the fed biomass, where the (HHV) of the biomass is computed from its ultimate analysis while the gas phase component HHV's are computed from their standard enthalpies of formation using a separate routine.…”